Either way, to say he isn't a pro bowl tight end is absolutely as false as it gets.

No **** sherlock. If you want to be literal about it that's a pretty obvious statement. But Franks was never a top tight end, regardless of whether he made the probowl or not. He had one season where he had more yards or catches than Greg Olsen had in his rookie season. It's ridiculous to say that Olsen is the more likely bust after a strong rookie season when we've already seen that Bubba Franks never lived up to the billing as a 14th overall pick as a pro.

And they both have 0 super bowl wins in that time, who cares what the record is? In addition to that, the bears will have a hard time getting 2 wins vs. the packers this season with their roster.

Short of winning the Superbowl or the division, sweeping the Packers is the next best thing for a Bears fan. When we went 13-3 in 2001 and lost twice to the Packers it wasn't quite the same. I'm guessing there is a fair share of Packers fans that feel the same way about last year. If you don't care about beating your rival you should stop watching sports.

Short of winning the Superbowl or the division, sweeping the Packers is the next best thing for a Bears fan. When we went 13-3 in 2001 and lost twice to the Packers it wasn't quite the same. I'm guessing there is a fair share of Packers fans that feel the same way about last year. If you don't care about beating your rival you should stop watching sports.

Nah, the loss to the Giants was about a million times worse than a useless loss to the Bears.

I don't care how many pro bowls Franks made, is he a probowl tight end? No.

Yes, he was. In 2001, his first pro bowl, he lead NFL tight ends in TD receptions with 9. In 2002 he again lead NFL tight ends in TD receptions with 7. 2003 he was not deserving, but then in 2004 he was deserving and didn't go. He suffered neck and knee injuries in 2005 and has been pretty awful since, but he was very good from 2002-2004.

You really want to get into this? Lets look at the much larger scale and see that the Bears still lead the all-time series against the Packers.

That's right Vince, that was Halas' fist in your face.

yeah, the bears "fans" always play the all time head to head card because it's all they have. they know they are the far inferior franchise in every way. less championships, crappy stadium, terrible ownership. wonder what they'll do in a decade when the packers take the all time series lead away...

yeah, the bears "fans" always play the all time head to head card because it's all they have. they know they are the far inferior franchise in every way. less championships, crappy stadium, terrible ownership. wonder what they'll do in a decade when the packers take the all time series lead away...

keep talking about the Bears sweeping the Packers. i'll make sure to come back to this thread and get a nice collection of quotes. :)

or, is it your goal to be in every Packer fan's sig quote at some point?

Even if the Packers win the next 4 games, they will still only break even against the Bears under Lovie Smith. On that point, however, you were the one that brought up breaking the win differential, even though recent history suggests it's only getting larger.

There's very often a thin line for you between logical argument and blatant inflammatory homerism. The facts aren't on your side in this case.

As for Olsen, there is of course the Orton factor, along with the fact that we operate out of a 2 tight end set, which will hurt his numbers. I think we've already established that Bubba had a few nice years. I also think it's pretty safe to say that if you take a tight end with the 14th pick in the draft, you're going to expect at least that much if not much more career longevity.

Anyway, like I've said before, I find the Olsen is a bust comment simply stupid at this point, so there's really no need to rehash.

Short of winning the Superbowl or the division, sweeping the Packers is the next best thing for a Bears fan. When we went 13-3 in 2001 and lost twice to the Packers it wasn't quite the same. I'm guessing there is a fair share of Packers fans that feel the same way about last year. If you don't care about beating your rival you should stop watching sports.

QFT.

There's only one Super Bowl winner out of 32 teams. Does that mean everyone team that didn't win the SB championship had a terrible year? There's winning your Division and winning your Conference. and there's beating the teams you hate. I still like smacking Yampa Bay around, even though they're gone out of the NFC Norte. That year of 13-3 for the Bears and our 13-3 last year have that little touch of: nice record, but your rival is still going to talk smack to you due to the double loss.

Look in the off-season, even with the players. Favre retires and the Vikings D-line is going on about how they'll get after Rodgers. The O-line stones them and then the smack talk starts in reverse.

Also, for this thread, who CURRENTLY on your roster do you think is under-performing?

Rodgers has started to earn his 1st round selection. Brandon Jackson has filled in OK and has had a chance in Grant's absence, but for a second round RB, I'm thinking starter more than back-up. For the Packers though, Justin Harrel, DT, is on PuP and has been a total dissappointment. What a worthless pick. It's even a worse pick when I look over who could have been taken, namely Aaron Ross to be groomed as the 3rd CB, which also would have hurt the Gints.